ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
The valuation of older adult homecare services under a joint medical-social budgetary perspective.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Homecare, a cornerstone of public health, is essential for health systems to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) of universal health coverage while maintaining its own sustainability. Notwithstanding homecare's system-level significance, there is a lack of economic evaluations of homecare services in terms of their system-wide cost-savings. Specifically, decisions informed by a joint medical-social budgetary perspective can maximize the allocative efficiency of assigning a diverse service mix to address the complex needs of the older adult population. However, little is known regarding which homecare service mix is most system-wide cost-effective when paired with which clinical profiles. Methods: Valuation of homecare's complex interventions was performed under a generalized cost-effectiveness analysis (GCEA) framework with proportional hazard-adjusted metrics representing the common numeraire between medical and social care. Results: Instrumental homecare, on its own or combined with either one or both of the other homecare services, yielded the greatest cost savings compared to other services or the lack thereof. When expressed under a joint medical-social budgetary perspective, instrumental homecare can reduce medical costs of HK$34.53 (US$4.40) and HK$85.03 (US$10.84) for every HK$1 (US$0.13) invested in instrumental and instrumental-restorative homecare, respectively. Conclusion: Instrumental homecare can increase hospitalization-free days among community-dwelling older adult and yield significant net system-wide cost savings. Thus, the current study demonstrated the feasibility of data-informed decision-making in system-wide resource allocation under a joint medical-social budget perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.